I think Jamie's probably right at the end - this isn't a myth they can truly "bust" without vastly more work, because they've only tested one avalanche in an area that's already patrolled and busting avalanches before they can get to a "set off by accident" level. Instead it could be pulled back and just confirmed that noise isn't going to set off avalanches in areas that are managed - which is a nice confirmation in and of itself imo. Always a fun show though!
He didn’t put enough of the surface area of his tongue lol They should’ve made sure to do that and then showed everyone how pouring warm water on it will detach it without ripping the skin off. Important info
As others have said people who live anywhere that has cold winter knows that getting stuck to a pole is not a myth. I also have had this problem with a popsicle.
I actually did this on a door handle once, at my neighbor’s, and it was HORRIBLE! It hurt like hell, I recall… but yeah, it was stupid as hell. I think I was about 7-8 years old… that was about 20 years ago.
I wonder with the yodeling one, if it's more likely to set off an avalanche if the person is at the TOP of the mountain? Or, at least, higher up/in the area where it would happen. Rather than a safe distance away. How would they test it this way? I guess by setting up a speaker and have the person sing over a radio. The thing is getting the correct volume, as well as clarity, since I think tone and frequency of the notes is important.
How does that make any difference?, you're obviously driving the same wheels in forward or reverse. I'd imagine any increased traction is predominantly due to the tread pattern & perhaps gearing ratio.
What many people don't know is that the front wheels of a car are not exactly parralel but are slightly converging. This makes the self-centering which you can feel when you turn. When you turn and let go of the steering wheel it will by itself return the wheels straight. When going in reverse though that also goes in reverse so instead of resisting turns they will amplify them so it's like having to balancing a reverse pendulem.
While some vehicles may have toe-in, the straightening force is infact due to self aligning torque. SAT is created by the differential shape of the contact patch under non-zero slip causing a net torque about the king pin.
There's obviously also the straightening or amplifying effect of the vehicle as a whole. ie: dragging fixed wheels behind you, instead of pushing them in reverse. When pulling the rear wheels they inherently align themselves behind the front wheels, whereas cause increased turning when pushing the rear wheels - even a small turn will continue even if the steering was quickly set dead straight(in the intended direction of travel) again. Instead you effectively have to align the steering with the rear wheels direction, then continually make corrections. This must be the far greater issue that causes reversing issues, and likewise why it's very difficult to correct once you've turned too far, whereas all you have to do to correct when driving forward is steer where you want the vehicle to go - regardless of where the rear wheels currently are. This is even more exaggerated with a trailer. Even if the wheels were self-straightening in reverse, I don't think it'd make much difference when reversing anything other than dead straight
The MP5 is a SUB machine gun meaning it's not firing rifle rounds and is using low velocity 9mm pistol ammunition. They are famed for being quiet and used in CQC situations because it's not a high velocity weapon that can over penetrate targets and perhaps kill civilians. This is why police and SF units still use them over an assault rifle today... It's hard to believe a show like this is really that ignorant or poorly researched/written. That along with the driving traction test makes this episode one of the worst I've seen... 😕
Summary: 1.) What can set off avalanches? -->Yodeling? Answer: Very, very unlikely, but maybe. -->Machine guns firing? Answer: Very unlikely, but maybe. (so that film with Charles Bronson that you all saw as kids was probably just BS!) -->Explosives? Answer: Yes! ----->Side Question: What happens to a person ("Buster") in an avalanche? Answer: They die. 2.) Is there any idea dumber than licking a frozen metal pole? Answer: Of course there are dumber ideas! In reality only pig's tongues stick to frozen metal poles! But doing this with your tongue is still a pretty dumb idea, unless you are Canadian. Canadians are immune, because their tongues have been naturally selected over the eons not to stick to cold poles! ^^ 3.) Is it safer to drive on icy roads backwards? Answer: Only if: a.) You have a front wheel drive & b.) You can drive as well looking backwards as you can forwards. Side note: front wheel drive cars actually have more traction driving in reverse. *Front wheel drive cars are better at driving forward on ice than rear wheel drive vehicles, at least from my experience.
I can't believe that is how they actually start avalanches - by throwing live dynamite from a chopper! That's so dangerous! Also, I wish Kari-Tory-Grant had access to a car with modern traction control. It would be interesting to see if it lives up to the hype or if they would still knock down a bunch of cones.
Dropping the explosives in itself seems unlikely to be significantly dangerous, there's seemingly never been an accident cause by the use of explosives, despite how common it is. Just flying in a helicopter in itself is almost certainly much more dangerous. The only real issue I could see is if the helicopter had a mechanical issue, or flew into a blizzard etc with explosives still on board. Albeit they could presumably just dump them out before any potential crash.
Part of the car on ice is torque. And combustion engines tend to have more torque at higher rpm. Driving forward should shift into a higher gear at some point, reducing rpm and torque. And passenger cars tend to have only one reverse gear. But driving low gear - high rpm will also give more torque. The question is rather if the powered axle is in the front or back of the driving direction. And same with the steering axle.
Lighting them INSIDE the cabin.. 🤣 keep them in his lap while lighting them.. 😭 what if there’s a breeze and one lands on the rail thingies outside the chopper
Not a valid experiment. The places and conditions that could conceivably have an avalanche from a yodel are exactly the places where, today, countermeasures are implemented and used way before those conditions arise.
The fact that even what looked like lots of explosives thrown out of a helicopter only produced three avalanches shows that the snow wasn't very loose.
I think Jamie's probably right at the end - this isn't a myth they can truly "bust" without vastly more work, because they've only tested one avalanche in an area that's already patrolled and busting avalanches before they can get to a "set off by accident" level. Instead it could be pulled back and just confirmed that noise isn't going to set off avalanches in areas that are managed - which is a nice confirmation in and of itself imo.
Always a fun show though!
Thank you for uploading these. Hard for me to access otherwise.
Thank you
He didn’t put enough of the surface area of his tongue lol
They should’ve made sure to do that and then showed everyone how pouring warm water on it will detach it without ripping the skin off. Important info
5:15 JODEL!!!... this made me laugh so hard..:D:D epic
"Dumb and Dumber" indeed. Anyone find that scene with Jeff Bridges' tongue on the ski chair funny?
As others have said people who live anywhere that has cold winter knows that getting stuck to a pole is not a myth. I also have had this problem with a popsicle.
I got my hand stuck in a freezer once 😅 That was not fun
I miss Grand :( may he rest in peace
Anyone who thinks the tongue pole thing is a myth is not Canadian.
Or Norwegian. I thought this was common knowledge.
I actually did this on a door handle once, at my neighbor’s, and it was HORRIBLE! It hurt like hell, I recall… but yeah, it was stupid as hell. I think I was about 7-8 years old… that was about 20 years ago.
Or Alaskan.
Or Pennsylvanian.
Or Michiganian.
Can confirm. Licking a steel railing at -29C does in fact suck. Good old youth
More pull in reverse is probably the result of higher engine rpm. Shifting down a gear when going forward should give a similar result.
Loving this, thanks!!!
Thanks for this upload. Coffee?... check. Cookie?..... check. Feet up and enjoy the video. 👍 👍
You may want to skip eating during this one XD
The problem with 4-wheel drive is that you can accelerate better, so people get more confident. But you can't break better, so they land in the ditch.
I wonder with the yodeling one, if it's more likely to set off an avalanche if the person is at the TOP of the mountain? Or, at least, higher up/in the area where it would happen. Rather than a safe distance away.
How would they test it this way? I guess by setting up a speaker and have the person sing over a radio. The thing is getting the correct volume, as well as clarity, since I think tone and frequency of the notes is important.
Jamie with those shades🤣Always remind me of Boris the monster from MIB lll
I Bet they Got the idea of Boris the monster from Jamie with those shades💯
A Savage reporting on a Hyneman in the wild..
I ❤ yodels
I have thought about driving in reverse but because the rear end has more clearance so is less likely to plow.
15 mph in reverse is stupid and dangerous and in no case, ever safer. I'm surprised that it ever came up as a myth.
ok now what type of tires are they using cuz BIG diff between summer, all seasons, all weather and snows? ...
i hate the way they covered the traction myth
If comparing driving forward and backward on ice, shouldn't the copilot be in for both ways?
Telluride is not the towns original name. It was known as "To hell you ride" in the late 1800's
The car in that film was a Porsche. An old Porsche might have grip in reverse because that is were the weight is.
How does that make any difference?, you're obviously driving the same wheels in forward or reverse.
I'd imagine any increased traction is predominantly due to the tread pattern & perhaps gearing ratio.
What many people don't know is that the front wheels of a car are not exactly parralel but are slightly converging. This makes the self-centering which you can feel when you turn. When you turn and let go of the steering wheel it will by itself return the wheels straight. When going in reverse though that also goes in reverse so instead of resisting turns they will amplify them so it's like having to balancing a reverse pendulem.
While some vehicles may have toe-in, the straightening force is infact due to self aligning torque. SAT is created by the differential shape of the contact patch under non-zero slip causing a net torque about the king pin.
There's obviously also the straightening or amplifying effect of the vehicle as a whole.
ie: dragging fixed wheels behind you, instead of pushing them in reverse. When pulling the rear wheels they inherently align themselves behind the front wheels, whereas cause increased turning when pushing the rear wheels - even a small turn will continue even if the steering was quickly set dead straight(in the intended direction of travel) again. Instead you effectively have to align the steering with the rear wheels direction, then continually make corrections.
This must be the far greater issue that causes reversing issues, and likewise why it's very difficult to correct once you've turned too far, whereas all you have to do to correct when driving forward is steer where you want the vehicle to go - regardless of where the rear wheels currently are.
This is even more exaggerated with a trailer.
Even if the wheels were self-straightening in reverse, I don't think it'd make much difference when reversing anything other than dead straight
19:37 no slap .... ? :(
The MP5 is a SUB machine gun meaning it's not firing rifle rounds and is using low velocity 9mm pistol ammunition. They are famed for being quiet and used in CQC situations because it's not a high velocity weapon that can over penetrate targets and perhaps kill civilians. This is why police and SF units still use them over an assault rifle today... It's hard to believe a show like this is really that ignorant or poorly researched/written. That along with the driving traction test makes this episode one of the worst I've seen... 😕
Yeah, instead of a lot of small rounds, firing one big shot might do the trick.
My god! The sub machine gun that they called a sub machine gun is a sub machine gun!?!?!
@@wingerding You must be special needs?...
for one that lives where its snows i always feel like these snow myths are just dumb
Andrew Younghusband has some words about your winter driving
Summary:
1.) What can set off avalanches?
-->Yodeling? Answer: Very, very unlikely, but maybe.
-->Machine guns firing? Answer: Very unlikely, but maybe. (so that film with Charles Bronson that you all saw as kids was probably just BS!)
-->Explosives? Answer: Yes!
----->Side Question: What happens to a person ("Buster") in an avalanche? Answer: They die.
2.) Is there any idea dumber than licking a frozen metal pole?
Answer: Of course there are dumber ideas! In reality only pig's tongues stick to frozen metal poles! But doing this with your tongue is still a pretty dumb idea, unless you are Canadian. Canadians are immune, because their tongues have been naturally selected over the eons not to stick to cold poles! ^^
3.) Is it safer to drive on icy roads backwards?
Answer: Only if: a.) You have a front wheel drive & b.) You can drive as well looking backwards as you can forwards.
Side note: front wheel drive cars actually have more traction driving in reverse.
*Front wheel drive cars are better at driving forward on ice than rear wheel drive vehicles, at least from my experience.
Maybe as front wheel drive wheels are applying power in the steering direction.
@@DoubleMonoLR idk seems logical, but I am too lazy to think about this too hard and I am not a physicist.
their expert yodler isnt very good at it
You can do the same thing if you lick your finger and stick it to a ice lollypop from a deap freezer
I can't believe that is how they actually start avalanches - by throwing live dynamite from a chopper! That's so dangerous!
Also, I wish Kari-Tory-Grant had access to a car with modern traction control. It would be interesting to see if it lives up to the hype or if they would still knock down a bunch of cones.
Dropping the explosives in itself seems unlikely to be significantly dangerous, there's seemingly never been an accident cause by the use of explosives, despite how common it is. Just flying in a helicopter in itself is almost certainly much more dangerous. The only real issue I could see is if the helicopter had a mechanical issue, or flew into a blizzard etc with explosives still on board. Albeit they could presumably just dump them out before any potential crash.
Part of the car on ice is torque. And combustion engines tend to have more torque at higher rpm. Driving forward should shift into a higher gear at some point, reducing rpm and torque. And passenger cars tend to have only one reverse gear. But driving low gear - high rpm will also give more torque.
The question is rather if the powered axle is in the front or back of the driving direction. And same with the steering axle.
Lighting them INSIDE the cabin..
🤣 keep them in his lap while lighting them..
😭 what if there’s a breeze and one lands on the rail thingies outside the chopper
Not a valid experiment.
The places and conditions that could conceivably have an avalanche from a yodel are exactly the places where, today, countermeasures are implemented and used way before those conditions arise.
The fact that even what looked like lots of explosives thrown out of a helicopter only produced three avalanches shows that the snow wasn't very loose.
This is horrible.